4 o 

<1> %<v 




.0 "^^ - 


















r * > • • '. ^ 



ilITfTX, .- 










o a 






'^^> 






.^ '^^ 






V 



*" 



>,* ^'% '^v^^^* /"%. 'j^^0S /-^ ^:^^^ ^ 

•• Vo^' .V^<- -^^o/ .•*>^'-. Vo^' --^ 






















"oV^ 



C^^ 



'>' 









- a 



5 . ^^w/- ^ 



o.^' 









o^ 






^- •- 



r^. 



THE CASE 



OF 



SAMUEL SHRIMPTON. 



BY 

WORTHINGTON CHAUNCEY FORD. 



[RkI'UINTKU FUOiM THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE MASSACHUSETTS IIlSTOHlCAL 

Society, January, 1905.] 



CAIVI BRIDGE: 

JOHN WILSON AND SON. 

Saiiitcrsttg il3rfss. 

1905. 



r 



n 



s^c 



ONE HUNDRED COPIES PRINTED. 

'■jut 

Author 
(Person) 



/^ 



% 



(\ 










THE CASE 



OF 



SAMUEL SHRIMPTON. 



At a meeting of the Massachusetts Historical 
Society, held in Boston, on Thursday, January 12, 
1905, Mr. Charles C. Smith communicated for Mr. 
WoRTiiiNGTON C. FoRD, of Washington, D. C, a Corre- 
sponding Member, the following paper : — 

The few known references in contemporary records to the 
matter of some hot-headed utterances of Samuel Shrimpton, 
and the attention they brought down upon him on the part of 
the authorities, were too indefinite 'to warrant further study. 
The discovery of certain documents in the Ciiamberlain Col- 
lection, now in the Boston Pubhc Library, rounds out the story, 
and throws some light upon the methods pursued l)y the agents 
of the government to preserve their dignity and maintain tlieir 
authority. 

The origin of tlie incident lay in the administration by 
Shrimpton of his fatlier's will. It will be recalled that the 
charter of Massachusetts was vacated in London in June, 1684, 
but a copy of the judgment of the foifeituie of the charter was 
not received at Boston until July 2, 1685, or more than a3'ear 
after the event. In that interval Charles II. died (February 6, 
1685) and James II. mounted the throne. 



In April, 1685, a vessel reached Boston bringing intelligence 
of the death of Charles II. and the proclaiming of James II. 
king. No formal letter was received, because, the charter being 
vacated and no government yet appointed for Massachusetts, 
there was no responsible head. But the copies of proclama- 
tions and forms were sent as to the other colonies, without any 
mention of the Governor and the Company. A second letter, 
written to Bradstreet, Dudley, and others, told them to pro- 
claim the king, advising them that it were best to do it early. 
Among those to whom this letter was sent was Samuel Shrimp- 
ton, and it was in this connection that the name first appears 
in the printed Diary of Samuel Sewall (I. 70). The new king 
was accordingly proclaimed in Boston, April 20, 1685, 

In 1(385 Peter Sergeant, and his wife, Elizabeth, raised a 
dispute with Shrimpton over the will, which was decided in 
favor of the latter.^ In October, apparently soon after the 
judgment had been rendered, the Governor and Council 
amended the law on wills ; or, to use the quaint phrase of that 
time, "the law about Wills is made into a new Edition." In 
November Shrimpton was summoned to answer to Sergeant 
under the new law, to which summons he made the not un- 
reasonable reply that " the Court proceeded upon a Law made 
since the vacating of the charter, and therefore he should not 
attend."^ This led Sewall to record, " so that this Monday we 
begin palpably to die," anticipating further decay in the au- 
thority of the Council under the administrative indefiniteness 
that existed. 

The subsequent stages of the matter are shown in the follow- 
ing extracts from Se wall's Diary : — 

December 14, 1685. "County-Court meets about Mr. Sergeant's 
Business chietly : Mr. Shrimpton's Letter is read : but 'tis not agreed 
on to proceed, and some Heat, the Vote being in a maner equal. 
Mr. Stoughton and Maj! Richards not there. Mr. Shrimpton pleads 
that he lias fullfilled his Father's Will dated July 17'.'' One Thousand 
six hundred sixty and six : and canot submit to this arbitrary way, 
especially as the Law [was] made since the Dissolution of the charter 
of this Place. Gov"^ seems somewhat resolute: the Court Adjourned 
till Thorsday.'"^ 

Thursday, December 17, 1685. ''At County-Court nothing done in 
Mr. Sergeant's Business : so he makes a speech when the Coiu-t open, 

1 Records of the Court of Assistants, I. 2~ii. 

2 Diary of Samuel Sewall, I. 104, 110. ^ jt„j,^ m. 



that if the Court ditl notliiiig they would give him a Record of it, that 
he miglit go elsewhere for he would not be kept out of 's Money ; 
speaking warmly. 

" Mr. Francis Stepney, the Dancing iNIaster, desired a jury, so He 
and Mr. Shrimpton Bound in oU£ to Jan' Court. Said Stepney is 
ordered not to keep a Dancing School ; if he does will be taken in con- 
tempt and be proceeded with accordingly. Mr. Shrimpton muttered, 
saying he took it as a great favour that the Court would take his Bond 
for £50." 1 

Stepney was to have liis jury "to try his speaking Blasphe- 
mous Words ; and Reviling the Government." He was fined 
j£100, of which £10 were to be paid down, " the rest respited 
until the last of March, that so [he] might go away if he would. 
He appeals : Mr. Shrimpton and Luscombe his sureties." ^ 
This entry shows that others than Shrimpton were critical on 
the methods of dispensing justice in the colony. 

In February, 168<3, another change was made in the law re- 
lating to wills, and the extent of the change will be best shown 
by a parallel : — 



October, 1685 

As an adition to the law, title 
"Wills, it is ordered by this Court 
and the authority thereof, that the 
magistrates of each County Court 
in this jurisdiction, being annually 
chosen by the freemen, shall haue 
full power & authority (as the 
ordinary in England) to sumoii any 
execcuto' or execcuto" appointed 
to the will of any deceased per- 
son, who haue declared his or their 
acceptance of that trust by offering 
the sajd will for probate, or other- 
wise requiring him, her, or them to 
give bond, with sufficjent suretjes, 
for paying all debts and legacjes, 
or to make and exhibbit vnto the 
Court, vpon oath, a just and true 



Febiuary, 1 685-6 

Whereas, the majestrates or 
members of the respective County 
Courts haue allwayes had power 
to receive & record all probates of 
wills, & of granting administi'a- 
tions &C'', it is further ordered by 
this Court and the authority thereof, 
that each County Court within this 
jurisdiction shall haue full power 
& authoiity, From time to tjme, as 
they shall see cawse, to suiuou any 
execcuto"" or execcuto" of any de- 
ceased persons last will & testa- 
ment, legally proved & on record, 
to appeare before the sajd Court, 
and to require him, her, or them 
to make & exhibbit into the regis- 
try of the Court a just & true 



1 Diary of Samuel Sewall, I. 112. 



i Il>i(l., 121. 



inventory of all the knoune lands, 
teuuements, goods, & cliattells of 
the deceased ; and in case such exec- 
cuto'' or execcuto" shall neglect or 
refuse so to doe, sajd Court shall 
proceed against such person or 
persons by imposing a line or fines 
vpon them, not exceeding tenn 
pounds p moneth for euery monthes 
default after the expiration of the 
time that shall be appointed by the 
sajd Court for bringiii in an inven- 
tory; and vpon complaint of any 
creditor or legatory, they shall call 
any execcuto' or execcuto'^ to ren- 
der an account of his or their 
administration. 



And it is further ordered, that the 
sajd Court shall haue full power to 
receive any information or com- 
plaint from any legatee of credito' 
against an y execcuto'^ for the detey n- 
ing any legacy or any legacyes given 
by the testato' or debt due from the 
sajd estate, and to grant sunion^ 
and process, as is vsuall in other 
cases, for the appearance of such 
execcuto"^ or execcuto"'", at dayes 
and place assigned by the sajd 
Court : and vpon neglect or re- 
fusall to appeare accordingly, the 
Court shall proceed to the hearing 
of the complaint, and to make their 
decree and determination thereon, 
and to grant forth execution for 
the fullfilling thereof; likewise, to 
heare & determine all cases I'elat- 
ing to wills and administrations, 
and to make theire decrees and 
grant executions there vpon, al- 



inventory, V2)on oath, of all the 
knoune lands, teniements, goods, 
and cliattells of the deceased, or to 
give bond with sufficient suertjes 
for the paying of all debts and leg- 
aties of the deceased. And in case 
such execcuto'' or execcuto'^ shall 
neglect or refuse so to do for the 
space of thirty dayes next after, or 
such further time that the sajd 
Court shall to them Ijmitt & ap- 
point, the Court shall proceed 
aganst such persons, by imposing 
a fine or fines vpon them not ex- 
ceeding tenn pounds p moneth 
for euery mon"'^ default after the ex- 
piration of sajd time so appointed, 
also vpon the complaint of any 
credito"" or legatory to call any ex- 
eccuto"^ to render an accompt of his 
or their administration. 

And it is further ordered by this 
Court & authority thereof, that the 
County Courts respectively shall 
haue full power to receive any in- 
formation or complaint from any 
legatory or credito' against the ex- 
eccuto"^ or execcuto'"'' to the will of 
any deceased person, for the de- 
teyning from him, her, or them 
any legaty or legatys givin by the 
testato', or debt due from the estate 
of such testators, and to grant 
forth suinons or process ; together 
with a copy of sajd complaint or 
information annexed, for the ap- 
pearance of such execcuto"" or ex- 
eccuto" before sajd Court, the 
sajd warrant, with the libell an- 
nexed, to be served fowerteen 
dayes inclusively before the day 
appointed for appearance ; and it 
shall be in the power of the Court 
to order the time of hearing at 



lowiug to the party agrieved lib- their first sessions, or at any ad- 
erty of appeale to the magistrates journmeiit of sajd Court as to 
of the next Court of Assistants, them shall seeme meet. And vpon 
such partjes attending the law as neglect or refusal of such person 
in other cases respecting ap[)eales ; or persons to appeare accordingly, 
alwayes provided, that where mat- the Court shall proceed to the hear- 
ter of is controverted, then either ing of the case, and make their 
plaintiff or defendant may haue a judgment or decree therein, &, 
tryal thereof by a jury, if it be grant forth executions for the ful- 
desired, w"* liberty of appeale to filling thereof ; likewise to heare 
the next Court of Assistants, as & determine all cases relateing 
the law directs, any law vsage, or vnto wills and administrations, 
custorae to the contrary notwith- and to grant forth executions vpon 
standing.^ their judgment given therein. 

All way es provided, that when 
matter of fact is controverted, then 
either plaint or defendand desiring 
the same before issue be joyned, 
may haue a tryall thereof by a jury to be forthwith suraoned by warrant 
from sajd Court; if there be no jury then empannelled, the sajd party 
or partjes making theire whole plea or allegation as to all matters of 
fact at their first hearing and answer, that justice may not be delayed, 
allowing liberty for any party agreeved at the judgment and determi- 
nation of the Court, or virdict of the jury, to appeale to the next Court 
of Assistants, giving in their reasons of appeale as the law dii'ects in 
either cases ; and euery person, before his complaint be received or ad- 
mitted, shall give caution vnto the Court to the valine of tenn pounds in 
money to respond all such charges & fees as the Court shall award, any 
law, vsage, or custome to the contrary notwithstanding, provided, that 
law shall not be vnderstood to debarr any person or persons from pro- 
ceeding in the former & vsuall course of law for the recouery of any 
debt or legacy due from the estate of the deceased person expressly 
determined by will." 

The ink was hardly dry before Sergeant hastened to begin 
proceedings : — 

" Thorsday, Feb. 25, The Law about Wills and Administrations is 
published ; and almost as soon as the Drumm had done beating, Mr. 
Serj' comes with his Petition : and an order is made for a Hearing next 
Monday ; 3 weeks, the 22'' of March : some would have had it sooner, 
and Mr. Nowel and Self thought it very indecent that it was so soon, 

^ Records of Massachusetta-Bay, v. 503. - Ibid., 508. 



8 

especially considering, the Order made upon a Law scarce yet out of 
the Marshal's Mouth." ^ 

This produced the catastrophe : — 

Tuesday, March 23. " Hear of the sad consequences of yesterday's 
County-Court, Mr. Shrirupton's saying there was no Governour and 
Company. Heat between the Members of the Court. I can't yet un- 
derstand that Mr. Nowell, Cook, or Hutchinson were there. Some are 
much offended that Mr. Shrimpton was not sent to Prison." ^ 

The story may now be tokl by the documents in the case 
found in the Chamberlain collection : — 

ORDER OF THE COURT. 

The Honourable Govr & Mag' lately assembled in y*" Count Court 
at Boston, Do iuforrae the Councill now assembled that M"^ Samuel 
Shrimpton being sunioned to attend s'' Court in* a Civill case, in a 
Proud & Contemptuous manner declared hims : y' there was no Govf 
& Company, of w*"'' the Gov' had [^illegible] & therefore he would make 
no answ! to y" sumons given him fur his appearance & added there- 
unto sevrall revileing words ag' y' Gov"": ^ 

Boston, 26 March 1686, upon w'''' The Court ordered y*" marshall to 
goe & tell M'' Shrimpton That the Court would speak w"' him, W'^'' he 
did & Returnd he was home to Nodles Island & sayd he had left Infor- 
mation & that they would send to him & y" Court Adjournd till 5"' day 
next 1*' Aprill 86 & ordered y'' Secretary to lett M' Shrimpton know 
y' at y time he should attend y" Court presently after y' leisure. E R S. * 

Endorsed: Complaint ag' Mr Samuell Shrimpton : to ye Council, 26 of March 
1686. 6 

SHRIMPTON'S STATEMENT. 

I did say, There is no Governour and Company of this Place in be- 
ing, That the Govern! had A Signification of the Dissolution of the 
Charter of this Colony and that I was not willing to Submit to Laws 
made since that day. And what I said to the Govern! as to wrong 
done, I then Explained to be only in Reference to an Arbitration 
wherein his Hono! was one, and without any Reflection with respect to 
any Judiciall Act : And if any heat then expressed it was occasioned 
by my being call'd after two or Three Thieves, and as I apprehended at 
Mr Sergeant's Choice, The Govern! asking him If he would Then have 

1 Diary of Samuel Sewall, I. 123. 2 j^^id^^ i28. 

3 This first part is in tlie writing of Thomas Danforth. 

* Edward Rawson, Secretary. ^ Cham. E. 13. 67. 



9 

his Cause Called Siiying there was but a tliiu Court, uotwithstaiidiiiif the 

Five Seiilo'' Magistrates of tiie Comity were present. The perticulars 

above, I yet aver to be True and if put upon it shall Endeavour to prove. 

And I am you' Honors Humble Servant 

Sam' : Shuimpton. 
Boston, April 1° I686.1 

INDICTMENT OF TIIE GRAND JURY. 

Wee the Grand Jury for our soveraign Lord the King for the ^fassa- 
chusetts Colony present & Indicte M' Samuel Shrimpton of Boston 
merchant for that he at the County Court sitting in Boston on the 22'"' 
of March last, in a Contemptuous violent & seditious manner & with a 
loud voyce did in open Court say that he was brought there by M"' 
serjants order & not by the Courts & that he denyed any such thing in 
being as Govern"^ & Company of the Colony and that he stood there to 
justify it & denyed their power and they might send him to prison if 
they pleased, which words in the same manner he repeated over & 
over againe with divers other seditious words & expressions as by 
the evidences will & may Appeare, thereby defaming the Generall Court 
& said County Court and Caused such a tumult in the Court as evi- 
dently tended to the high breach of his maj'"'" peace & great scandall & 
reproach of his maj"" Government here & all this Contrary to the peace 
of our Soveraign Lord the King his Crowne & Dignity & the laws of 
God & of this Jurisdiction & particularly [the law title Courts Sect 6 :] 

Wee fiude this bill & leave it to further Tryall. 

Penn Townsend Foreman 
in the names of the rest of the jury. 

22. 2 : 86 This Indictment was received in upper court the 17''' of 
Aprill 1686 = Edw''. Rawson Secr>- "^ 

DRAFT OF WARRANT.^ 

To Ju° Green marshall Generall or his lawfull Deputy. 

In his Maj'yes name you are by vertue of an orde' of the Court of 
Assistants required to Attach the Person of M' Samuell Shrimpton of 
Boston merchant & Require him to Give you his Bond w"' suretyes 

1 Cliam. E. 13. 57. Tlic paper is printed in part in the Records of the Court of 
Assistants, I. 297. Those Records also give {2Q8) an account of the appearance 
of Shrimpton before the Court on April 15, and his demand to be tried by a 
jury. 

2 Ibid., Gl. It is printed in the Records of the Court of Assistants, I. 
299. 

^ This warrant was issued as Shrimpton had not appeared before the Court, 
as ordered. 



10 

iu a thousand pounds for his personall appearance before the Court of 
Assistants to sitt in Boston on the 22"' Instant at two of the clock in 
the afternoon on their adjourum' to Ads'" what is layd to his charge by 
the Virdict of the Grand Jury given in on the day of the date hereof 
against him & in Case of his Refusal! to give bond you are In like 
manner Required to Coinitt him to y"" prison in Boston till the Courts 
Adjourum' Make your Returne and fayle at you"" perill Dated in 
Boston 17"' of April 1G[86] By y' Court 

Edward Rawson, Secret.^ 

WARRANT AS ISSUED. 

To Jn° Greene Marshall Generall or his lawful! Deputy. 

In liis Maj"""^ name you are required to app'^hend the body of M"" 
Samuel Shrimpton of Boston merchant & require of him bond with 
suretyes in one thousand pounds ste"^'^ for his personal! appearance at 
the Court of Assistants to be lield by Adjournment at Boston the 22* 
Instant at two of the clocke in the afteruoone to make his answer to the 
p'^sentm' of the Grand Jury by them given in against liim at the Court 
of Assistants held at Boston the day of the date hereof for his 
seditious Carriage w"' a high hand in open County Court in Boston 
22"' marcli last & Contempt of his Maj'^"'' authority as is most particu- 
larly expressed in said Indictment, and on his faleur to give bond as is 
above required you are to Comitt liim to safe keeping in the prison 
in Boston liereof you are to make a true returne under y"^ hand & faile 
not at you" perrill. Dated in Boston 17 April! 1686. 

By y*^ special! orde"" of the Court of Assistants 

Edward Rawson Secrtty. 

ENDORSEMENT. 

22 April 1686 
I have apprehended the body of M"^ Samuel Shrimpton of Boston 
merchant by vertue of the within warrant by order of the Court of 
Assistants under the hand of M": Edward Rawson Secretary bearing date 
the 17 of April! 1686. and did then require bond of him the said M"" 
Samuel Shrimpton in tlie sum of one tlaousand pounds sterling according 
to the within warrant he refuseing to give bond according to y" said 
warrant I have comitted him to y" safe keeping of the prisonkeeper iu 
Boston by vertue of the within warrant. 

John Green MarsM Generall.^ 

1 Cham. E. 13. 63. Probably the first form of the next paper or actual war- 
rant issued. 

2 Ibid., 62. 



11 

SHRIMl'TON TO THE SECRETARY. 

April 17j 1080 
M"? Skcretary. 

S", — I am Informed that the Govern'' & Magistrates are in Ex- 
pectation of my appearance at the Barr this Morning, but lean not tell 
in vvliat form of Law. I was ueitlier Committed to Prison, nor bound 
over, nor so much as Injoin'd to Appeare, nor ever gave my word for 
Appearance, nor iiave I received any Copy of my Charge to prepare 
Answer, and tlierefore am of Opinion that my Attending the Court at 
tliis time can not Issue the matter cliarg'd upon me. I hope I may 
expect the Favour & Just procedure of Law against me, as the Law 
provides for every English man. I am 

Sr Yo^ Serv" 

Samuel SiiuiMrxoN. 
Endorsed " Kead in Court 17 Aprill 1686 i 

SHRIMPTON'S STATEMENT. 

To the Honoured Court of Assistants now sitting in Boston Samuel 
Shrirapton humbly Shevveth. 
That as to what Lately happened from me in the County Court I do 
acknowledge that notwithstanding the provocation that I then thought 
was given me The Passion that was moved in me, & the maner of my 
Expression & mauagem' thereupon was very Intemperate, unjustify- 
able and Evil ; and so much I would willingly have acknowledged ujjon 
the recollecting my selfe, had the Court at that time given the Opper- 
tunity as I wish they had ; It is well known I have never been an 
Euimy to the Governm^ here Established; nor desirous of its over- 
turning, but have been Obedient to it and served the Publick willingly 
& Chearfully at all times according to my Capacity ; and wish I 
might have Oppertunity so to doe still for many a Day : so that I do 
truly affirme, that it was not at all in my Intention and I am Confident 
also not in my Words to deny the being of Government or of Courts 
for the Exercise there of in the common & ordinary way of Justice and 
usuall proceedings amongst us : all that I denied, was with reference to 
that new Law & method of proceedings established since Judgment 
given against the Charter according to which I was then prosecuted, 
This formerly and at that time was my Plea in Law & Legall Defence 
in the case, from which I do not nor can not depart, hoping that such 
an Opinion in point of Law & the pleading there of will not in any of 
his ma''"^ courts be Judged to make me so high a Criminall, and if this 
that I now say may be so far accepted by this hono''''' Court as to pass 
by my Errours of Passion I shall greatly Rejoyce, however I am sorry 

1 Cliam. E. 13. 04. 



LofC. 



12 

I have been the Occasion of so much trouble to the court & was not 
then so fully sensible of the 111 consequence, not Intending the weak- 
ning the hands of Authority by any Reflections. 

I am 

Yo' hono""^ humble Servant 

Sam^ Shrimpton. 
[22 April, 1686'] i 

SHRIMPTON'S PLEA. 

Samuel Shrimpton being to appeare at the Court of Assistants sitting 
in Boston by adjournment April the 22' 1686 to answer to an Indict- 
ment or presentment found against him by a Grand Jury whereof Pen 
Townsend was Foreman, Pleads not Gilty of any Crime the punish- 
ment whereof is Loss of Life, Member or Banishment, or belongs to the 
Court of Assistants to heare and Determine. In the Indictment or pre- 
sentment there is to be considdered. 

1" The matter of Fact, The Words Spoken, : 2^ The Place Where. 
3'! The time when. 4!'' The manor how the words were spoken, 
In a contemptuous, violent & seditious maner, & with a Loud Voice. 
5° The Effect they wrought, Defaming the Generall Court & County 
Court and caused such a Tumult in the Court as Evidently tended to 
the High breach of his Ma''P Peace and Great Scandall of his Ma"" 
Government here. 6'!' The Conclusion, Contrary to the peace of onr 
sovereign Lord the King his Crown and Dignity, and the Laws of God 
and of this Jurisdiction, and particularly the Law Title Courts Section 
the Sixth, 

1° The Words said to be Spoken, That I was brought there by M' 
Sergeant's order and not by the Courts, If they were Spoken were oc- 
casioned by the Governo" speaking to M' Sergeant once and againe, 
asking him whether he would have his Case called or no, alledging it 
was but a Thin Court. So that in my apprehention it was wholly & 
absolutely at M' Sergeant's \_illegihle\ whether I should be called at tliat 
Court or not, allthough the Court was Adjourned purposely for my 
tryall, which I counted a Favour to M' Sergeant & Disfavour to me 
more then either of us deserved and more than I Expected. 

2'! The Place where the words were spoken, namely at the County 
Court sitting in Boston. 

S'J The Time When, was the 22'' of March last, by the Indictment 
no man can tell when that was, because the Indictment is without Date. 
I humbly concieve it is void & null by Reason of the want of a Date, 
The Time, the Day, & Year when the offence was Committed, as 
well as The Place Town & County where it was done, is Essential to 
the very being of an Indictment, The Laws and Customs of England 

1 Cham. E. 13. 60. 



13 

evince it, and agreeable therewith is the Law of this Jurisdiction, 
Title Indictments, The Indictment must be made & Exhibited within 
one Year after the Offence Committed or the Indictment is void and of 
none Ktfect, who can tell by this Indictment when the Fact was Com- 
mitted ? or when the Indictment was made or Exhibited? But if it 
be alledged That the Date to the Indictment may be added or the Time 
when the Fact was done otherwise manifested ; I answer I am of 
Opinion (1") That the Date can not be Supplied. The Jury is Dissolved 
and hath no being and therefore can not Act ; That which hath no 
Essence, Can not have Action. 

The Court can not add the Date because it is Post Factum after the 
Inquest, and Return of the Bill, and if there be either Addition or Dim- 
inution or any Alteration, it is not the Same Bill which the Inquest 
found, but anoth' which was never before their Consideration. (2'') I 
conceive that the Time when the Fact was Committed and the Indict- 
ment Exhibited can not be proved by the Witnesses because it is not 
contained in the Bill ; Let what will be contained in the Evidences, 
Yet the jury have found no more than is Contained in the Bill, and 
no more nor no less am I to Plead unto : For altho the Jury have 
found I spake such words, They have not found when, & so indeed have 
not found any thing, and therefore I humbly think the Bill is void & of 
none Effect. I pray yo'' bono? to considder it. 

An Attachment for but Fourty Shillings if it hath no Date will be 
voide and no Tryall or Judgment can pass thereupon, Then surely by 
the like Reason, an Indictment without date it being of a farr higher 
nature whereby Life, Limb, or Liberty is hazarded upon the tryall 
ought to be void. The higher the fact the more exactly Legall in all 
Respects ought the proceedings to be. 

4° For the mailer of Speaking the words, I confess that what words 
I spake was uttered with too Loud a voice, & in too violent, A maner, 
for which I am hartily Sorry and humbly Crave yo"^ pardon. I was 
provoked and moved into Passion by the Sence of that Indignity & 
Ignominy that was put upon me by being called amongst Theives & 
Rogues, at the pleasure of my Adversary : and if they were Contempt- 
uous, yet [rotted away] breach of any Law the Penalty whereof is Loss 
of Life Member or Banishment, nor do I know why the Word Seditious 
is put into the Bill, except because one of the Wittnesses whose vener- 
able esteem [of his ?] own parts and knowledge moved him out of his 
own low Sphere of Wittness into the high one of a Judge, whose Zeale, 
Pride or Envy carried him above the AYorke of a Wittness of Giving 
his Evidence in the matter of Fact which he was Called unto. Into the 
place of a Judge in giving a name to the Fact which he never was 
call'd unto, which Insolence deserves Reproof, rather than his Integrity 
merrits Applause. 



14 

5° Concerning the Effect which the Words wrought, They did not 
Defame the Generall Court nor County Court, They had no relation 
unto them but unto the Govern' & Company ; I suppose there is a 
Distinction between the Govern"' & Company, & the Generall Court & 
the County Court, The Gov"' & Company I think consists of the 
Govern' & all the Freemen ; The Generall Court consists of the 
Govern'' or Deputy Govern' Assistants & Freemen's Deputyes or 
Representatives: The County Court consist of any Three Magistrates, 
I never defamed the Generall Court, nor any other Court, I spake not 
of Courts but of the Govern' & Company whose being I denied, and 
not of Courts, whose Existence might be continued by his Ma"""^ Gratious 
Proclamation, notwithstanding the Charters Condemnation. 

6° As for the Conclusion I deny it, Those words were not contrary 
to the Peace of our Sovereign Lord the King his Crown and Dignity, 
Nor Contrary to the Laws of God, or this Jurisdiction, nor no breach of 
the Law, Title Courts Section the Sixth, The Peace of the King was not 
violated for as much as at first Coniand of the Govern', the Court was 
cleared & the Peace preserved : The Kings Crown & Dignity no 
wayes opposed or detracted from, Nothing of the Kings Govermf here, 
denied : but only the manner of the Existence of it in the Govern' & 
Company of the Massachusetts, By virtue of the Charter which is 
vacated ; which in good Consequence is an Asserting of the power of 
Governml here to exist in the King, and by virtue of the Kings Procla- 
mation in those persons in Authority ; Therefore not against the Kings 
Crown & Dignity. 

Neither against the Law of God nor the Laws of this Jurisdiction 
know no Law I have broken, But in Spetiall maner the Law title 
Courts Section Sixth, not broken. I have not Defamed any Court of 
Justice, I spake not a word of Courts or their Sentences, The Govern' 
& Company never was a Court. I hope by what is premised it will 
appear 1° That the Lidictment found against me is void & of none 
Effect, having no Date, and therefore ought by Law to be Quash'd. 2^ 
that 1 am not gilty of the breach of any Law the penalty whereof is 
Loss of Life, Member or Banishment, nor of any crime Cognis [^illegible] 
at the Court of Assistants, nor gilty of the breach of the Law Title 
Courts Section Sixth, not having defamed any Court, nor having spoke 
any thing concerning any Court or their Judgments or Sentences 
[illegible] of the Being of the Govern' & Company which I did 
deny, it being my Opinion, and if that be a Crime it is not Defama- 
tion of any Court, but the most is Contempt, which lieth not at this 
Court. 

Neither have I been an Enemy to this Jurisdiction, but have been 
allwayes Willing & Ready with my person & Estate to suport the same, 
in the same way it was settled by the Patent, and should be Glad if it 



15 

was the Kings Pleasure to Reestablish it upon its oUl Foundation & 
Basis, being not Desirous of Innovation but of Reformation. 

Samuel SiiuiMrTON, 

Endorsed : M^ Slirimptons Plea put in & was read in open C of Assist"- 22"' of 
Aprill 1686 

SHRIMPTON'S OBJECTIONS. 

I can not nor ought to plead to this Indictment for Severall 
Reasons. 

1° It is not made in due form of Law, For it doth not mention the 
County where the otTence was committed, The word New England is a 
Generall word, it may be done in the County of Essex or Norfolk or 
any other County & tho afterwards tis s'' the Grind Jury for the 
Massachusetts Colony, do Indict «&' yet names not the County where 
the offence was done, nor for what County they serve, nor where they 
did meet or where the Indictm' was taken, Now the Law is positive. 
That the County as well as y*" Town must be Express'd. v. Ship : 
Country Jus! p. 133. & Pract: Regis"' p. 136. 

2'.' The Indictm'. is not Dated, neither the year of o' Lord nor the 
Year of the King mentioned, nor the month nor Day, & so is uncertain 
nor doth appear when it was done, therefore Defective in an Essential! 
part, The Law is Positive That this ought to be expressed, neither can 
it afterwards be supplied by averment or Implication. Pract. Regis" 
p. 122. & 136. Ship : Country Jus : 115 : 126 p : 138. Duty G : Jurys 
p: 139. & 140. 

3'! In the Indictm' there is words Inserted, that are not in the Law 
or Statute w"'' it is founded upon, The Indictm' saith [In the Law 
Title Courts sect 6'.'' ] w'^"' Law speaks about Defaming, but not a word 
of Contempt, violence or Sedition. Now the Law is plain, That an 
Indictm' framed upon a Statute ought only to pserve the words of y" 
Statute. Pract: Regist!^ p: 121. 137. 

4. The Indictm! referrs to the Evidences without naming what, or 
whose evidences, & so in effect referrs to nothing. The witnesses 
Names & Dates of their evidences ought to have been Incerted in y*" 
Indictm'. 

5° By the Laws & Customs of England all the Jurors as well as the 
Foreman, should subscribe their names, or else the Indictm! is defective 
w"'! in this case was not Done. 

So that upon the whole I say, The County & Time being wholly 
uncertain, & words being Introduced besides & not psuant to the words of 
the Law or Statute on w""" the Indictm! is founded & the referring to 
evidences without naming y*^ witnesses & the Dates of their Testimonies 
to w^'' it referrs, & finally not Duely signed by all of tliem (The Least 
of w"^*" objections is abundantly sutlicient to Quash the Indictm!) I can 



16 

not see any Ground or Reason for me to plead or make answ^ to y^ 
Indictm' 

Samuel Shrimpton. 

Endorsed : Mr. Slirimpton's Objections sent in bj-^ y^ Marshall Gen" 22 Aprill 
(86).i 

With this paper end the records relating to this colonial 
incident. I think the case of Shrimpton is interesting as an 
exhibition of the exercise of arbitrary power. Although tlie 
following paper has no relation to this case, I add it as one of 
the few letters of Shrimpton to be found. 

Boston, March 2'' , 1685/6 
An Answer to Hudson Leverett Attorney to Richard Pateshall 
plan! his Reasons of Appeale, From the Judgment of the County 
Court, for Suifolk 27" Octob"^ last, To the Hono"'"-' Court of Assistants 
now Sitting : Exhibited by Samuel Shrimpton in behalf of Stephen 
Haskott Defend', s'' Shrimpton being Security for the s'' Haskott. viz' 
1° The Bill which Haskett gave to Pateshall was Conditional], 
with proviso, that Israel Thorne should not be forced, or taken away 
by force of Law. Now to say, That an Impress by ord' of the 
General Court or of the Governo' & Councill, is not, or hath not the 
force of Law, is at once to Strike at both the Law & also the power & 
authority of the General Court, (the highest in this Jurisdiction) The 
111 Consequences where of would be needless to Enumerate. 

2'! That the s'' Israel Thorne was Impressed by Order from Au- 
thority & did go & Serve in the Indian Warrs, whereby the said 
Haskett was wholly Frustrated of his Work & Service, (The only 
occasion & Reason of his Bill to Pateshall) and that he did not againe 
returne. & enter into the Service of the s'^ Haskott as is Falatiously 
pretended, was by the papers then given in, made plain & evident to 
the County Court & Jury, and undoubtedly will so appeare (when duely 
Considered) unto this Hono*"'^ Court & Gent of the Jury notwithstand- 
ing the vain & false Pleas & Suggestions to the Contrary expressed in 
the Appellants Irrationall and Impertinent Paraphrase upon the Pro- 
viso-Clause, in the Bill will be no Just Ground or Occasion to Reverse 
the former Judgment, But that the Bill it selfe will be found void & 
null. The Condition therein Express'd not being performed, and Con- 
sequently that the former Judgment will be Confirmed wl'' Costs &c 
All which is humbly offered in behalf of the Defend! by 
Yo"^ Hono'^'' Ilumb"" Serv" 

Samuel Shrimpton.^ 

1 Cham. E. 13. 65. 2 md.^ 59. 



3477«6t 



LB D '05 










> 































0^ 



^^x'^^^y^ 



\. .■■- J' ■^'^ '^r--'.'^' 






4- 






'.^'^^V^^. 









'^"^ii:^--^. 



^V 



.^' 






'Jtc A^ *V 



■\ 



^C V^ 






-.■7 c> 



v-^' 



"i^ 
':^::.'*-% 






^°o ., 









f. 





'■n. 


0^ 


• ■ 




^ 
v^*. 


^J.' 


',• , 












\.^^^ 


















/"% -3 








>' 


- « o . *<J>^ 








j^.^ 


•'u^^v:'. -t. 






X'. 






% 



^^ 






,V^ 










• ."i 









** 



